I guess it depends on whether staying true to the spirit of TES lore is "pissing" on it.

Expecting lore that vast and non-specific to be absolutely precise across all games is pretty naive, if you ask me.

He's quoting from a source that's partially fan-based, AFAIK.

I mean, really ;)

Have you played since they added the Legerdemain skill line?

——

About the Lore, his biggest annoyance is that Cyrodiil is not a jungle, something that was retconned by Bethesda themselves when they made Oblivion. The rest is rebuked by someone later in the thread.

Yes, but I'm not talking about thievery - but stealth-related combat. I don't think stealth and detection works as well as it does in Skyrim - and obviously you can't have instant-kill stuff in a PvE/PvP game, so they're not as powerful as I like assassin stuff to be.

Archery, however, is even weaker in terms of feel and flow. I think Skyrim does archery better than pretty much any other game - and I love using a bow :)

Indeed.

While I'm by no means an expert on lore in TES - I do recognise when something breaks the spirit of a particular style - and I think ESO feels very much like a typical TES game in terms of the lore.

I've read maybe 50 books or so in TES games, as I sometimes get the urge to immerse myself - and I tend to like them fine, with a few being really cool. I've had the same experience with ESO, more or less.

I'm much more into reading journals and quest-related stuff, though, and I can say for sure that ESO is just like the other games in that way.

In terms of dialogue and NPCs, it's actually better than most TES games for my part, as I tend to care about the quests and the characters - which was rare when I played Arena, Daggerfall, Morrowind, Oblivion or Skyrim (there ARE exceptions). I seem to recall liking Redguard more in this way, but I could be imagining things. For Battlespire, I don't remember anything about the writing. I just remember it running like a particularly drowsy dog on my top-end hardware.

Of the post-2000 TES games, I think Morrowind failed the most when it comes to engaging me in the quests and the NPCs.

Oblivion had several embarrasing moments and was also quite bad in that way. The only reason I'd rate it above Morrowind for writing would be the notable exception of the Dark Brotherhood questline, which I thought was brilliant when I played it.

Again, to me, Skyrim is the best TES game overall - and also in terms of dialogue and NPCs for the singleplayer series.

Then again, I was never much of a fan of Bethesda writing. They have a very inconsistent style - I find.

That said, it's been ages since I played Morrowind. I can't rule out something really great happening during a conversation - I've just forgotten about it.

It's also fair to mention that I do NOT like "weird" alien stuff - and I absolutely hated the cliffhangers and those awful little worm/caterpillar beings.

You can one-shot things with a bow while in stealth in PvE, as long as they are normal mobs. I've done it in with a DK Bosmer at least.

The archery in ESO does kinda sucks though.

Yes, I've done that too - but those are normal mobs :)

In Skyrim, you could assassinate really tough humanoid enemies if you invested in the right perks and used powerful weapons. You had specific melee-oriented animations with throat-slitting and stuff.

For MMOs, they have to keep that kind of thing in check - and because of latency issues and what not, stealth is never really a completely smooth or precise experience. Essentially, it's too easy to stay hidden and sneaking isn't much of a challenge. It feels very gamey.

That's not to say it's bad for an MMO, but I just think Skyrim is much better as a stealth game - even without being anywhere near perfect.

You have to mod Skyrim to get a proper stealth experience.

Never been able to do that in Skyrim on not-normal mob. Even with a cheated character. the level scaling made sure of that…

You can do it :)

Level scaling wasn't as rigid, though - and you needed the right skills/perks and a good dagger or similar to do it.

Not sure what you mean by not-normal. I'm just talking about areas with humanoid enemies way above your own level.

Skyrim has two types of creatures: normal with normal HP/lvl and bosses which are HP sponge (usually some bounty target). Those bosses are what I mean by not-normal, you can't one-shoot them, they have too much HP (x16 dual wielding sneak attack didn't even take off more than 1/5 HP of one of them, the bow sneak attack was worst, frustrating when the rest of the cave mobs are one-shot).

I also couldn't one-shot normal Forsworns with a maxed/cheated character (using sneak+ conjured bow with all perks and a modded three that increase the damage more than vanillia). It's like I was back to Oblivion making porcupines.

Dart I was very clear that I felt the lore was "deeper" due to the level of integration into the world and the main plot. Not the number of freaking books. Apparently you don't like that answer and prefer to instead opine on your amazing levels of cognitive competence. Aka you are still a tool.

Still at it, then? I'm the one derailing? Really :)

I have no problem with your answer, it just doesn't make any sense in terms of depth. Not to me, anyway. Integration into the main plot? Fine. Depth? I don't see it.

Even so, why can't you appreciate that other people might find Skyrim lore as deep when it's got 50% more of it?

But that wasn't the answer I was looking for. I asked you why I'm ignorant about Morrowind when I say the style of lore is similar across all TES games.

You started the derailment and we both know it. I was trying to help by giving my honest opinion about how ESO compares to the other games - and you had to enter and insult me.

You said I was ignorant because I said the lore is similar. Are you still disputing it's similar? If so, can you see how that's simply your opinion - and not something that would make me ignorant about the game itself.

In short, can you be fair about this or not?

Even so, you can one-shot powerful enemies way above your level - which isn't possible in ESO. Well, not to my knowledge, anyway.

I said on Morrowind you are ignorant as I don't think you have played it. That is not intended to be an insult. I insulted you later for other reasons. Sure we can play fair. But part of that is you should at least play the game before you critique with such conviction.

So, when I say I played it for weeks upon release, I'm lying?

I've played it again several times - and I've tried a fair share of both expansions. Didn't help much at all.

Could you point out what part of my criticism is unfair?

I hope I'm wrong, but it really sounds like you simply can't handle that I don't like the game - and you have to desperately invent bullshit reasons why that makes me ignorant, somehow.

I don't think 2 weeks is sufficient to read and play all the lore the game has to offer.

I'd argue that all the games share the same lore. It's the same universe, after all. It contains references to the same events and it all builds off of each other.

You could say, for example, that the new lore the Oblivion introduces is of lesser quality than that of Morrowind, but the lore that was introduced in Morrowind is still valid in Oblivion, and The Elder Scrolls Online, for that matter.

I do sense a bit of Morrowind elitism in this thread. :)

There's certainly a touch of "my opinion, that I can't really account for, is fact and you're ignorant if you don't agree" ;)

Not terribly surprising, though.

Anyway, I think I've wasted enough time on this.

I still recommend ESO if you're looking for a lore-heavy TES game and you can deal with the inherent MMO weaknesses.

I think what people mean is that they feel the story in Morrowind is better than in later Elder Scrolls games because it is tied up more into the lore. That sounds a lot better, actually. :)

Back to ESO, I have found that the MMO weaknesses are not so strong in this one. There are many, many self-contained stories and it's not just an NPC waiting for its button to be pushed so that a wall of text can explain that he needs X amount of Y killed. It's really nothing like any other MMO that's I've played before.

At heart, it's still very much an MMO - and it has to be. It means there are clear restrictions of power due to balance, and there's a distinct predictability in terms of progression and what you can expect to encounter.

For instance, you'll never - EVER - go into a dungeon and find a fantastic item that will boost your power tremendously.

You also won't encounter a monster that's not suitable for your level - unless you willingly go into a high-level area, in which case the mechanics won't allow you to defeat a high-level enemy, so you'll just die.

This makes for a somewhat limited feeling of exploration and freeform gameplay, which is pretty counter to TES.

But it's better than most at hiding these things, and if you're not a seasoned MMO gamer - it can work well as an illusion of being a singleplayer game.

It's better at it than SWtoR, that's for sure.

That said, I still think Secret World does a better job when it comes to atmosphere and story - it just sucks when it comes to combat, progression and the end-game.

I'm sorry, how is this different from a single-player RPG? Even in TW3 you have level limitations on what gear you can use. I mean, even in an MMO, you need to find some stuff some of the time that makes you go, ooooh now I'm stronger! Is it really that different?

Yeah, I gotta start that game up again some time, too. The story just started to get really interesting. Definitely another MMO that's not the same as all the rest, but I like that ESO has bigger zones.

Yes, it's very different. In TW3, you can increase your power tremendously by getting the right gear. The Witcher school gear can change you from wimp to very powerful, for instance and the very first example is available at level 2 even though it's 6th level gear. MMOs do this too, but to a much smaller extent, because they depend on a very rigid power curve for the game to stay challenging in the designated area. You can't go to a higher level region and survive no matter how great your gear is, unless you're near the appropriate level. You can do that in TW3 from a pretty early stage and you can do that in all TES games.

All TES games except ESO, you mean. ;) I'll believe you straight away, because you spend more time contemplating this stuff than I'll ever do. But doesn't that also mean that the MMO game has bigger longevity? I mean, that's the point, I guess. You can't have an MMO and be finished with it after only a couple hundred hours. That's also sort of appealing, that you know that you can stick with the game for a long time.

P.S. Even in the more action-oriented and player-skill-based ESO, you can't survive in higher-level zones?

I like MMOs too, you know ;)

But I'm strange in that I can enjoy games while recognizing the flaws. Some people prefer not to think about them, and that's cool.

ESO has a LOT of meaty content and that's great, it really is. But it's still very much an MMO in these ways.

You need to be quite close to the level to stand a chance. That's just the nature of level based MMOs. Of course, the best gear and a great build coupled with skill will do better, but nothing like a game like Skyrim, where you can defeat mobs way, way beyond your level due to lax mechanics and balance.

You almost made through an entire post without being the prick that you are. It's this kind of shit that gets you on ignore lists you know.

I guess that's the really great thing about ESO, if you like both worlds. I for one didn't like the shallow quests of WoW, and people claimed that that MMO was revolutionary in its quests and lore compared to previous games—because there were actually quests and storylines!

I think back to Dark Age of Camelot and shake my head…

Wow, now. There's only one person that is calling names, and it's not him. So as for ignore lists…

Knock yourself out

Yeah, you can dish it out and you can be dishonest. You can't be accountable, you place the blame for your own negative acts on others, and you can't take as good as you give. You have to rally for support against "bad DArt" because you don't have the confidence to stand alone.

I'm the tool, prick and whatever. Sure.

Not worth my time.

End of derailment with Todd.

Well, WoW was something of a revolution - because it was the first MMO to have PvE progression center almost entirely around story-driven quests.

I agree that the quests were mostly shallow, but in the beginning of WoW - there were quite a few elaborate ones with interesting chains. I was always particularly fond of the Duskwood questline, which was a pretty serious gothic Ravenloft kind of story.

As WoW has "evolved", however, I find the quests entirely forgettable. Not because there's no story involved, but because it's so inconsistent and the vast majority of them are silly and exclusively for kicks. There's no incentive to engage myself in the lore at all.

That's very unfortunate, because I think WoW has the most compelling world of all the MMOs - and it has a tremendous amount of visual variety.

That's one area where ESO disappointed me, because even though it's quite vast - there's a distinct lack of visual variety. Now, I'm not saying there's no variety - just way too little of it.

For instance, if you take the Aldmeri Dominion areas, it's essentially all forest with limited visual variety - as in shades of green. I like the capital city tree, but that's about it for standout areas. That gets old really fast, for me. That said, I guess it's true to the lore of the Bosmers, but that doesn't help much.

I've played all three factions, but I've yet to see the swamp areas of Ebonheart pact - and I'm hoping those might stand out more.

Craglorn is pretty cool, though, as it doesn't really resemble the other areas.

But you're right, the quests are very good - as is the writing. The voice acting is mostly decent - though there are awkward examples in between.

The most impressive part of it is the sheer amount of quests and how elaborate they are. It's probably the first MMO to offer literally hundreds of hours of completely unique quests.

Other games have made that claim, but the truth is that they end up offering a mixture of unique content mixed with mostly repetition of one kind or another. SWtoR is a good example, because they seriously claimed the game was like 12 KotORs all in one. That's a laugh, because if you take the combined hours of unique class quests, I doubt they add up to much more than 30 hours when you take away the travelling. The rest are sidequests that are identical for each class on that particular side.

I'd say ESO has around 3 times the amount of combined story content - and it does NOT bog down the player with endless filler combat and pointless walking around.

That's pretty damned impressive.

I don't really remember any story lines, but I do remember every zone and what they felt like. When WoW was new, it was really great to explore the world. It helped that I was in a nice guild ever since beta. Now I kinda long to check out to vanilla WoW again--and apparently this is possible with a torrent of an old version of WoW and a private server… hmmmm. :)

That's too bad. I was hoping and expecting, based on the game's size on disk, that there would be a lot of variety. All those GB's can't just be voice acting!

I'm glad to hear that (presumably) this keeps up later in the game. I'm only level 8 and leveling is pleasantly slow. I'm not in a hurry, because I'm simply running quests and exploring the world. Hopefully the exploration will stay interesting even while the zones don't have enough variety.

Well, I tend to let things rest in the past. Vanilla WoW was definitely something special - but now it's gone and that particular magic will never be back. Time for new magic :)

I feel the same way about the SWG and EverQuest "special" servers. I just can't go back to something that old and worn.

I mean, I enjoy the warm feeling of nostalgia, but I know - in my heart - that I can never get back to that same place. Life doesn't work like that, sadly.

Keep in mind that it's just my opinion. I'm sure some people think it has a ton of variety.

It's not like the areas are identical or anything - and they have to stick to the lore.

But, to me, WoW is truly fantastic when it comes to area variety. It's almost as if each of the countless zones is a completely unique set on big budget movie, you know?

LOTRO is also quite brilliant in this way.

I'd say ESO is about on par with Guild Wars 2 when it comes to visual variety.

My highest level char is 30-something, so I haven't seen all the areas. I've seen the Aldmeri Dominion zones, because I tend to get curious and explore ahead. I've seen 3-4 of the Ebonheart zones and 2-3 of the Covenant zones. Beyond the starter areas, that is. I've also seen the Cyrodiil PvP zone and Craglorn. Cyrodiil is massive, but it doesn't live up to Oblivion Cyrodiil. It's quite bland in terms of visuals, really.

But there's still quite a lot left for me to see. I'm hoping the new areas they plan on adding will feel more unique.

What are talking about "rally support"? Did I start a hate club or something? When did I dodge responsibility for calling you names? I can see you thinking I'm a tool and a prick for over reacting and behaving badly by resorting to name calling but the rest of your post simply makes no sense. If Thaurin wants to ignore my that's his choice so I simply said "knock yourself out".

You're completely right, of course.

Yeah, how does this work, anyway? I assume that the different factions flow into the same zones after a certain point? Around what level do the factions play in the same areas and with the same quests? You can't tell me that they are all unique from start to end game…

For PvE, the factions are kept entirely separate until they reach level 50. At level 50, you gain access to the other areas - but I'm not sure exactly how it works, whether they just open up - or you have to complete the main quest or whatever.

Anyway, once you're there - you'll be able to quest in the other (all) areas at will, experiencing their content in a scaled version.

I haven't tried this myself, so I'm just going by what I've read about it.

However, I pre-ordered the game and got myself special access to start in any faction regardless of my race.

So, from 1-50 - you're limited to your faction areas plus Craglorn and Cyrodiil.

Post 50, you gain access to the other areas - and all content is scaled to level 50+ challenge.

I should probably add that Cyrodiil is actually both PvE and PvP, so the factions DO meet in a (partial) PvE zone before 50, if they want to ;)

So the game just turned out to be three times as big as I thought. :) It's all good, because I like the Aldmeri Dominion zone and quests, more than what I've seen from the other two.

But that's a pretty crazy amount of content.

Oh, right. I remember something about blending PvE and PvP, so you're fighting both mobs and other players at the same time? And is the PvP like DAoC, as in realm vs. realm vs. realm?

Well, the zone is positively HUGE - as in really, really, really big ;)

So, you'll have ample opportunity to roam free and PvE without too many encounters. Well, I think so - but I haven't played much in Cyrodiil. I wanted to save it for later.

It's sort of like DAoC - except that it's a separate instanced area and there are more than one instance as it's divided into campaigns. You pick between certain kinds of campaigns, which have different timers and players in it. But I'm NOT an expert here.

IIRC, DAoC integrated PvP into the main gameworld - but I haven't played it since a few weeks after release. I never cared for the MMO genre before WoW, except for a brief love affair with Ultima Online.

I just tend to check out all big titles, so I've played almost all MMOs that aren't obscure since The Realm back in 1996 ;)

I came to DAoC late, but it had separate RvsR zones for different level ranges. You could dual in the PvE zones, though. DAoC was my first MMO and it was pretty crappy, except for the PvP, I guess. But that's where I first shared an online 3D real with other players and that was magical. :)

But people tended to just stand at a certain spot and farm respawning monsters over and over to grind levels, which took a long time. I don't think I've ever seen more than a handful of quests.

Still, I feel nostalgic towards the game. These days, running around with other players doesn't really amaze me anymore like it did back then, and I take it for granted. :(

That was exactly my problem with it :)

It all seemed so terribly drone-like and grindy to me. I never even knew about the supposedly fantastic PvP until years later.

I think my highest level character was a "Thane" at level 16. At that point, I abandoned my friends in digust of the grind.

I feel nostalgic too, but I can't turn all that wasted time into this great modern gaming experience. I just can't.

Listening to certain persons on MMO-centric websites, that is how MMOs are supposed to be designed, quests shouldn't exist, players should be grinding mobs.

Although, DAoC had more quests than the MMOs released before it (I played it at release for a month). I left after that though, the grinding wasn't for me and I didn't touch a MMO for years until DDO F2P conversion…

I've got to play ESO one of these days. I'm just not social, so I hope I can find a way to play and ignore everyone else, but I love the lore and it sounds like exploration has been nailed too.

To me, the biggest difference between Morrowind and everything after it, is that the devs were in constant communication with the players during the development. There was a dedicated #Morrowind channel on Dalnet and the devs were in there for hours and hours talking about the game, asking opinions, and just hanging out. After Morrowind's success, both the devs and the community drifted apart. The Devs let the success go to their head somewhat and quit taking input from the community.

Given that Skyrim sold more than 20 million copies, it seems to have been a wise business decision, if it's indeed true that they have ignored player input.

I don't think so, though.

IRC died ages ago as the way to get in touch with players - and the way to receive player input has changed.

I know Todd Howard gets a lot of hate around the net, but I find him to be quite the straight shooter. When I look into his eyes, I don't see a person who doesn't care about player feedback. Quite the contrary.

Personally, I think the best way to develop a game is to have a powerful vision and passion and stick to it.

Listening to input is wise indeed, but I'd never want to play a game driven by the community - as I have about zero faith in the combined community to make a game worth playing.

As for Bethesda, I think Oblivion is the only game that sort of strayed too far from the path. I think some of that was business and a desire to expand the audience, sure, but I also think there was a boldness and a genuine care to evolve the genre. You don't go around developing a dynamic AI (flawed as it was) if you just want to squeeze out one more buck. That's not a safe or sound business decision.

If you want to look at development without drive and passion, I'd go look at Assassin's Creed after it became so huge - or some EA sports title.

I'm absolutely confident that Bethesda - as a company - cares deeply about taking things forward.

As a veteran and, dare I say, hardcore gamer - I certainly think they've succeeded in more ways than most RPG developers.